The two things you need to know about the Wong Kim Ark case are: 1) His parents were legal immigrants.2) The government tried to use a law passed 10 years after his American birth to deprive him of his citizenship. This interpretation made it an ex post facto law, which is prohibited under article I, section 9 of the constitution. This case clearly says that any change to jus solis can not be retroactive to people already born in the US. It may (or may not) say that children born in the US to legal permanent residents are automatically citizens. But the case says nothing about children born to illegal immigrants, tourists or temporary workers in the US. This is something Congress can decide under the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause. It would not require a constitutional amendment.

Don't expect anyone east of Colorado or Texas to get it, though. Moving out west really opens your eyes to how hysterical Mexican kids behave. The males must adopt a posture of machismo later on to compensate for their super drama-queen stage as boys.

Parents from most other groups (but especially blacks) would smack him and tell him to stop his shameful faggot histrionics. It's amazing how Mexican parents let that crap go on and on even in the most public of places like a supermarket or crowded park.

So add that to the list of things that the taxpayers will have to provide the illegals' kids with -- muzzles and straitjackets.

Given the pathetic state of the law and Constitution (it is whatever the Law School Deans and Media and various justices say it is), I see no reason why ex-post facto laws cannot be brought into existence.

Not the least of which is the money question. As tax receipts collapse in what Pimco calls "the new normal" (i.e. semi-permanent recession, growth rate at about 1% or so, not even keeping pace with population growth) ... AND the imminent collapse of Mexico (Bolton predicts Mexico's government collapsing within a year) ... masses of people wanting government money is incompatible with spending what little is available on people here.

Job creation at the extreme, with the margin gone, can only be accomplished by kicking out illegals and their descendants. Someone will ride that horse.

Wow, this is not news. I remember a Taiwanese researcher telling me back in the early 90's that Chinese immigrants had been doing this for years. In fact, so many of the immigration chickens now coming home to roost visibly took flight decades ago. Things written in 1994 still seem like they were written for an editorial page in 2010.

Unrestricted population growth started off as a localized cancer, but now it has metastasized beyond the usual settlement areas. I fear the patient -- our nation -- is doomed.

Once some of these welfare migrants obtain SSI and a section eight apartment they're free to do as they please; there's no monitoring system. Many travel overseas for months at a time, their SSI being electronically deposited in their bank account. Other relatives may be living in the apartment; sometimes they've been in the business of subletting it on the sly. Having worked in the field of social services and dealt with these people, I was always amazed at how many of these welfare recipients were able to travel around the world for months at a time. When asked how they could afford airfare to go to the other side of the globe they always said it was paid for by relatives. Apparently all these welfare recipients have rich relatives. The foreign scammers make our own domestic ones look paltry.

"The Democratic Party is devoted to the current iniquitous system for one simple reason: it generates more Democrats."

I disagree. The Democratic party is also devoted to the current system because they're leftists and MUST be non-discriminatory. In other words, they're not just calculating and rational about this as you suggest. Their ideology demands they support the current system and squash objections to the current system.

I disagree. The Democratic party is also devoted to the current system because they're leftists and MUST be non-discriminatory. In other words, they're not just calculating and rational about this as you suggest. Their ideology demands they support the current system and squash objections to the current system.

You can't be right, because the current system is discriminatory. It discriminates against Americans in that Americans do not have a reciprocal "right" to the resources of other nations. The current system enforces a double standard in this regard. Double standards are discriminatory.

Absolutely not true. A politician has so much foresight he tries to change the electorate 18+ years into the future? Really?

Many politicans, and even more of those who fund their campaigns, are 5,770 years old. They will turn 5,771 on September 8.

But even setting that aside, I don't get your point. It would seem extremely likely that politicians of all stripes would have the foresight to do all sorts of things with the intent of causing future repercussions.

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.